Mohammed Shami said:Overpitched on middle
awtaJimmy Neesham said:
Four
I'm struggling to understand the reasoning.Boult is padded up as well according to CricInfo, looks like we're going to bat until we're all out. Strange decision
Nah it's not strange at all really. You can say you'd rather see them bowl and so would I but it'd be less than pragmaticBoult is padded up as well according to CricInfo, looks like we're going to bat until we're all out. Strange decision
We've batted our butts off to save this match - why give India even the slightest sniff? Understandable decision.Boult is padded up as well according to CricInfo, looks like we're going to bat until we're all out. Strange decision
Because cricket is played to win series, not matches.Playing the game is about winning.
The likelihood of India chasing this is tiny. The likelihood of the BC's bowling out the opposition is reducing as I type.
Why on earth would you keep batting?
417 to win. Safe to say BC's are in the driving seat and we know BMac likes to of FTW.Because cricket is played to win series, not matches.
South Africa almost chased down 500 at a good rate a couple of months ago and sides are easily chasing down 300 plus scores in fifty overs. 420 in 70 overs is still doable.I don't understand how it's even a sniff when India quite literally need almost 6 an over in test cricket though.
We've batted our butts off to save this match - why give India even the slightest sniff? Understandable decision.
IMO, winning 2-0 should be a goal. Considering the RR required, and the fact that NZ can slow things down to a crawl and set 7-2 fields if they really wanted, there is no way India could chase at this point. Their chances of winning are just miniscule.Because cricket is played to win series, not matches.